kitty shall not make unconfirmed system changes per default

[migu]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Kitty's new (0.24.0) shell integration is enabled by default, as it is stated in the documentation: https://sw.kovidgoyal.net/kitty/shell-integration/#configuration

This behavior is very inconvenient, because users who do not want their bashrc be modified automatically have to read the changelog before an upgrade to switch off this behavior.

In my case it's that I have my own system of configuring shell integrations and I don't want to clean up after tools that don't know how to behave.

Describe the solution you'd like
Make all (new) features optional, especially if they involve modifying files that do not belong to kitty itself. Never modify files external to kitty without the explicit consent of the user.

Users can always choose if they want to use the feature by reading the release notes or the documentation.

Describe alternatives you've considered
No alternatives came to my mind.

Additional context
It is a principle of Unix tools that they do not modify files they do not own. This is being violated by kitty. It is important that users have full control over their rc files and they are not modified unnoticed.

[page-down]

This has been discussed in the shell integration RFC issue.

[RFC] Shell integration
#3948

[kovidgoyal]

Then switch to a shell that allows invoking programs to inject code into
it without modifying its rc files, like zsh or fish.

[migu]

In bash the terminal is closed when I want to auto-complete a directory name. At least for bash, the feature seems to be broken.

[kovidgoyal]

This will be caused by something in your bashrc, bisect it to find the culprit and provide a minimal bashrc to reproduce.

[migu]

The culprit is obviously kitty. ;) When I find time I will analyze the cause and probably open a bug. However, this will be difficult because the terminal is closed. The topic of this issue is something different, though.

[migu]

Then switch to a shell that allows invoking programs to inject code into it without modifying its rc files, like zsh or fish.

Why did you close the issue? I wanted to point out an important issue with kitty and you just impolitely denied my case.
That's sad because it ultimately means I have to quit using kitty - and cannot support it in the future anymore.

[kovidgoyal]

As pointed out by page-down, this has already been discussed during the almost 4 month long beta period. I dont have infinite time to repeat every discussion with every person on the internet that has an opinion different from mine. If you thing adding three harmless lines to your basrc is a reason to not "support" kitty, suit yourself.